Sources of Ancient Indian Polity
Chapter – 1
- The study of Ancient Indian Polity and Administration faces challenges due to limited sources and scattered references.
- Systematic literature on political science began around 500 B.C., following developments in semi-secular subjects like grammar, etymology, and astronomy from the 8th century B.C.
- No systematic political science texts exist from the Vedic period (Age of the Vedas and the Brahmanas), but Vedic literature contains scattered passages revealing theories and practices of government.
- The Rigveda has limited references, while the Atharvaveda offers more insights into the institution of kingship.
- Yajurveda Samhitas and Brahmana literature describe coronation ceremonies and sacrifices for kings, highlighting the king’s status, taxes, and privileges associated with different castes.
- By the 8th century B.C., specialization in grammar, etymology, prosody, and astronomy led to distinct schools; a school of politics developed slightly later, likely around the 6th century B.C. along with the Dharma-śastra.
- Political science achieved independence as a field in the West with Aristotle’s Politics, where he separated politicsfrom ethics.
- The Mahabharata and Arthashastra of Kautilya reference early works and theories on polity, listing pioneers such as Brahmadeva, Siva-Viśālāksha, Indra, Brihaspati, Sukra, Manu, Bhāradvāja, and Gaurashiras.
- Notable ancient works like Manusmriti, Yajnavalkyasmriti, Parasarasmriti, and Sukraniti are often attributed to divine figures rather than human authors.
- The Arthashastra provides numerous references to scholars like Visalaksha, Indra (Bahudanta), Brihaspati, Sukra, Manu, Bhāradvāja, Gauraśiras, Parashara, and Pisuna, indicating established schools of political thought.
- Various schools claimed different founders: Manu, Brihaspati, and Sukra (Uśanas), with affiliations to Brahma, Indra, or Siva.
- Early political texts were likely handbooks for beginners, evolving into comprehensive works referenced in the Mahabharata and Arthashastra.
- Many early political works did not survive, with some content possibly preserved in the Rajadharma section of the Mahabharata and overshadowed by Kautilya’s Arthashastra.
- Quotations from Visalaksha appeared in later texts like the Balakrida, a 9th-century commentary, showing the continued influence of these early writings.
- These early writers compared polity to Vedas, philosophy, and economics; some, like Usanas, argued politics was the most important science.
- The monarchical model dominated these discussions, focusing on the training of princes and qualities of ideal rulers.
- Key discussions included treasury management, fort and army issues, ministerial structure, and foreign policy principles.
- Bharadvaja favored submission to the strong, while Visalaksha supported fighting to the end even at great risk.
- Vätavyādhi rejected the Shadgunya theory in favor of Dvaigunaya.
- Taxation received limited attention, with no quotes in the Arthashastra on this from these writers.
- Topics covered included civil and criminal law, with schemes of fines and punishments for various crimes like theft, robbery, and misappropriation.
- These early treatises are seen as precursors to Kautilya’s Arthashastra, touching upon topics similar to Books I, II, III, IV, VI, and VII but in a less comprehensive manner.
- The Mahabharata is a key source for understanding ancient Indian polity, with the Santiparvan’s Rajadharma section offering extensive insights into kingly duties and government responsibilities.
- Chapters 63-64 emphasize the importance of the science of politics, while Chapters 56, 66, 67 explore theories on the origin of the state and kingship.
- King’s duties and responsibilities are covered in detail in Chapters 55-57, 70-71, 76, 94, 96, and 120, alongside the roles of various ministers in Chapters 73, 82, 83, 85, 115, and 118.
- Taxation is discussed across several chapters (71, 76, 87, 88, 120, and 130), but detailed duties of officers are not specified as in the Arthashastra.
- Internal administration is briefly mentioned in Chapter 87, and foreign policy along with peace and war are widely discussed in Chapters 80, 87, 99, 100-103, 110, and 113.
- The Rajadharma section advances beyond earlier writers’ works, potentially integrating some of their theories.
- Other sections of the Mahabharata, like Sabhaparvan Chapter 5, outline an ideal administration, while Adiparvan Chapter 142 discusses Machiavellianism in certain situations.
- Sabhaparvan Chapter 32 and Vanaparvan Chapters 25, 32, 33, and 150 delve into emergency policy.
- The Arthashastra of Kautilya is a seminal work on polity, revisiting earlier topics with thoroughness and proposing original theories.
- Book I examines issues surrounding kingship, and Book II offers a comprehensive look at civil administration.
- Books III and IV address civil, criminal, and personal law, while Book V outlines the duties of the king’s followers and retainers.
- Book VI details the seven Prakritis of the State, and the remaining chapters focus on foreign policy, circles of kings, and strategic warfare and diplomacy.
- Unlike theoretical works, the Arthashastra serves as a practical manual for administrators, addressing government machinery and functions in peace and war in unmatched detail.
- A debate surrounds the date of the Arthashastra, with scholars like Shamasastri, Ganapatishastri, and Jayaswalarguing for its authorship by Kautilya, minister to Chandragupta Maurya.
- Scholars like Winternitz, Jolly, and Keith suggest it is a later work from the early Christian era, possibly edited over time.
- The absence of Mauryan empire details (e.g., city boards, foreigner care procedures) is cited by those who argue against Kautilya’s authorship, as well as third-person references to Kautilya.
- Proponents of Kautilya’s authorship point to the colophon attributing the work to him and his statement about empire jurisdiction from the Himalayas to the ocean.
- The Arthashastra appears focused on a normal state rather than the large empire model, hence its omission of empire-specific details.
- Some omissions, like boards of five officials, may be due to their non-official nature, and third-person references to Kautilya could reflect a common Indian authorship style.
- Society in the Arthashastra permits practices like levirate, widow remarriage, and post-puberty marriage, aligning with Mauryan era norms.
- The work shows minimal respect for Buddhists and discourages people from leaving their families to join religious orders, indicating a prevalence of non-Buddhist practices.
- Frequent use of “yukta” to mean official reflects terminology in Asoka’s edicts, suggesting Mauryan influence.
- While later passages may have additions (e.g., references to China and Greek-derived terms like suranga), the core content is Mauryan and embodies Kautilya’s views.
- Kautilya was not only a statesman but also a founder of a political school, influencing figures like Durvinita and Marasimha in the Ganga dynasty, who were later praised for following his statecraft principles.
- The Arthashastra holds a unique position in political literature, similar to Panini’s Ashtadhyayi in grammar, as both works overshadowed predecessors whose contributions were subsequently lost.
- Later scholars in political science viewed the Arthashastra as a comprehensive work, leading to fewer original worksin the field.
- Smritis like those of Manu, Vishnu, and Yajnavalkya (circa 200 B.C. – 200 A.D.) incorporated discussions on kingly duties, officers’ roles, and civil/criminal law, providing a practical resource for daily use.
- Unlike the Arthashastra, the Smritis also addressed varna (social class), dharma (duty), and prayaschitta (penance), making them more appealing to the general public.
- The Smritis’ approach to administrative problems was broad, and the limited activity in political theory prevented further development of new works.
- The Arthashastra and a few early manuals set the foundational form of political science, with no substantial innovations or theories emerging later.
- A semi-religious and semi-moral perspective among writers limited political theory expansion; they recognized the king as a servant of the people but emphasized divine punishment over secular remedies for tyranny.
- The absence of secular remedies for dealing with autocratic rulers, such as guidelines for withholding tax payments or expressing public opinion, restricted literature development on governance.
- Questions of regicide (killing a tyrant) were acknowledged, but details on when, how, and by whom such actions should be taken were left vague, often attributing punishment to divine intervention.
- Unlike Hindu philosophy or poetics, which encouraged abstract thinking and speculation, political literature lacked depth and bold ideas.
- Epigraphical evidence indicates regional variations in taxation and local governance, with new taxes and local institutions evolving over time.
- Despite changes in taxation and governance practices across provinces, new books on these subjects were not written, possibly due to adherence to local traditions rather than codified standards.
- The administrative systems of the Guptas differed significantly from the Mauryas, with further changes during Harsha’s reign and early medieval dynasties.
- Despite these administrative changes, no new literature emerged, likely because these shifts were seen as minor details rather than foundational changes.
- The lack of political literature after Kautilya’s time has been partly attributed to foreign invasions (200 B.C. – 300 A.D.); however, this seems unlikely, as Greek, Scythian, Parthian, and Kushan rule was largely confined to Punjab.
- Madhyadesa and Bihar, the core regions of Aryan culture, remained relatively unaffected by these foreign conquests.
- The Arthashastra’s influence led to a lack of originality in political literature for the first millennium A.D., as its insights continued to dominate public thought.
- Some manuals on polity were composed post-Kautilya, but they lacked innovation and merely summarized earlier works.
- Kamandakiya Nitisara, likely from the Gupta era (~400 A.D.), is a metrical summary of Kautilya’s work, focusing mainly on the monarchy and omitting sections on republican states and law, likely due to Smriti writers covering these areas.
- The Nitivakyamrita, written by Jain author Somadevasuri (~960 A.D.), is another summary of earlier political thought but without significant original contributions.
- Sukraniti, with an uncertain date but likely post-Kautilyan, is more detailed in describing administrative machinerythan other works, covering monarchical governance and omitting republics.
- Sukraniti includes sections on the king’s duties, foreign policy, warfare, and justice administration, along with discussions on social philosophy; some later-added verses discuss guns and gunpowder.
- The Barhaspatya Arthashastra is a brief, later manual with limited depth on polity and administration.
- Later Smritis and Puranas (Gupta and post-Gupta period) touched on state and governance, though without new insights or significant contributions.
- Around 1000 A.D., originality declined across Indian academic fields, including political science.
- Between 1000 A.D. – 1700 A.D., compendiums were created that included rājaniti (politics) as part of Dharmaliterature, blending theological with political viewpoints.
- Notable works from this period include Abhilashitārthachintamani by Someshvara, Yuktikalpataru by Bhoja, Rajanitikalpataru by Lakshmidhara, and others, but their political sections often quoted previous works without adding new ideas.
- Theological aspects dominate these works, with detailed sections on rituals, coronation, omens, and kingly purification practices.
- Rajaniti Prakasha has extensive instructions on coronation ceremonies, and Nitimayukha provides guidance on personal rituals for the king.
- Topics on ministers, forts, treasury, foreign policy, and war are included but rely heavily on quotations from earlier authors.
- Some vernacular works also appeared, such as a Marathi manual by Ramachandra Pant Amatya (~1680) for Shivaji’s son, but these too lacked originality.
- By this period, creative political thought had effectively ceased, largely due to the dominant influence of the Arthashastra and a shift toward theological interpretations in polity literature.